she is on par with Anakin and Luke before let's drop this title she powerful cuz she is an Ex-Palpatine you only Label her cuz she is a woman i don't see you doing that Wonder Woman and Alita there Mary Sues as well you sexist Pigs
shareYou seem to be struggling to see the right keys to hit on your keyboard. Have you considered new candles in your cave?
shareLMAO
shareLolololol
shareGive it up... Most people are thumbing away on their phones while walking. It takes too much thought to figure out if they are ignorant, stupid, clumsy or just in a fucking hurry. I just try to translate their garbled ramblings into English and make the best of it.
shareshe is on par with Anakin and Luke before let's drop this title she powerful cuz she is an Ex-Palpatine you only Label her cuz she is a woman i don't see you doing that Wonder Woman and Alita there Mary Sues as well you sexist Pigs
Horsegirl is a Mary sue
shareFrom what I've read and heard, most people didn't consider her a Mary Sue character because she wasn't from a powerful dynasty or lineage, but because her character achieved goals and was favoured by all around her without effort or trial.
I also don't think it has much to do with her femaleness. The same geek crowd that grumbled "Mary Sue" at Rey delivered positive love for Wonder Woman.
Didn't wonder woman and Alita have this remarkable thing called TRAINING? Didn't they both suffer failures and defeats and had to earn their powers and our respect?
The whole reason why Rey is a mary sue and the other sare not is exactly what you say, she achieves any and all goals, reaches insane levels of powers (compared to other characters around her), earns love and respect immediately from all those around her and does so without real effort or trials/failures.
Not only does this make her a Mary Sue it basically makes her the new hallmark example of a mary sue. To argue against this is just insanity driven by blind agenda. "What? a female lead character couldn't have been poorly written, the criticism MUST be the result of sexism" This is just a straight up fallacy argument and has no basis in logic, reason or reality.
I didn't see Wonder Woman or Alita (although the latter looked interesting). But I will take your word for it.
Yeah, Rey didn't achieve what she did through trials and failures (like most hero-quest heroes). She was given that by the writers.
On the other hand, I didn't really mind it too much, to be honest. To quote Harrison Ford, "It's not that kinda movie". I just wanted to have fun for two hours; Star Wars was already a dead franchise to me (first three for me - nothing else), so I didn't need it to be a great Star Wars film, just fun. It was, so I was happy.
A bigger problem with Rey, for me, is that she isn't really interesting in terms of characterisation. Luke was a bit of a flatline, too, but because he failed and grew, and failed and grew, I could insert myself into his struggles and he became a placeholder for me as a viewer. Rey doesn't because she's already a god. But she didn't have enough of a personality to be interesting.
Godlike characters with personality are interesting. James Bond, for instance, is often too good at everything (nobody does it better!) but his charm, wit, hedonism, arrogance, and style create a compelling character I want to hang out with.
Not so much Rey. Finn was better (love coward-heroes; Rincewind all the way!). Kylo Ren was interesting, too (I think he was actually the main character of the new films; he had the strongest arc!) Rey was just "there"...
Exactly, everything was given to Rey by the writers; the plot bent around her and made sure she always was the best and always looked awesome; and then they framed the actual visuals to really highlight just how awesome she is. I mean they were laying it on pretty damn thick.
I disagree with Harrison Ford, Star Wars touched on something a little deeper. The themes, mythos, and lore were more than just 2 hours of escapism. For me as much as I do not like the the prequels; they did not ruin star wars for me. I was still excited until about 1 hour into TFA, TFA is the film that killed it for me; not only did I not like any direction they were taking with the story and characters and I did not have any fun watching it.
I agree Luke was a bit of a flatline character, but we could relate to his struggle and be inspired by how he overcomes those failures. Rey is such a hyper wish fullfillment character that never struggles, only an incredibly self absorbed person could relate to her. You know the modern type of kids that are all focused on their self important lives, the "i'm spiritual but not religious" crowd.
Another thing about James Bond that allows us to overlook how good he is at things is his established background as a trained spy with decades of experience. Even when he is 'over' competent we can tolerate it because of this known background. though even sometimes it is a bit too much. How much more so for Rey though who neither had training nor experience and yet comes across as being the best at everything and godlike?
yeah, Rey is a character that seemed to be lacking any distinguishable personality traits. Her only traits are inexplicable nobility and focus on finding out who she is.
We're in complete agreement here.
I disagree with Ford about the first movie - first three movies, really. Although, he was right that the realism of hair dampness from one scene to the next wasn't what was going to make or break the film. But, yes, the themes and mythology of the first films were amazing and - ironically - the attention to detail in creating that world was a big part of that. I was more saying that my expectations for TFA were set at "have fun; eat popcorn", not at "all characters must be written with the sophistication of a Dostoyevski cast".
100% on Luke. "Flatline" was sort of a negative/facetious way to say "everyman". These characters don't have the most interesting traits to keep them relatable. But what's also true of Everyman characters - and key to their relatability - is their struggles. Luke fails and learns, growing as a person. So, even though he doesn't have the quirks and depth of other characters (like Hamlet or Bill the Butcher), we can still get into his journey. He also has a better arc, both in each movie and through the OT (an arc which is squandered in the sequels...)
I had another conversation here about why the sequels were more obnoxious to the OT than the prequels. The consensus was, if memory serves, that the OT had a bunch of plot holes and inconsistencies, but it didn't matter because the arc of the OT was intact. The sequels throw RotJ's ending in the trash, which is where the bad taste left in the mouth comes from, I think.
You're dead-on with Bond's training. He also solves problems with his established skillset instead of being granted the best skills at everything. This is true of Luke, too. He's an okay pilot, but not as good as Han. He learns some Jedi stuff, but that's explained. And he never out-classes anybody at "their" thing.
Yes I would say we agree totally on why Rey is a badly written character.
Of course no film is "perfect". But Star Wars was once more than just a popcorn flick (it was that and more) it touched on themes as deep as any drama even if set against the backdrop of "space wizards" and "laser beams". The reason why it stuck such a nerve with the audience was because of the combination of those themes with the space battles. That does not mean every character needed to be a "Dostoyevski" level of depth, as you point out Luke was not that deep of a character; but because he wasn't plot breaking in terms of special treatment by the narrative, he didn't need to have a lot of depth. A way of saying it, the story was told through the character Luke. With Rey it feels like the story became about her and not through her.
Yes, one of the main reasons we like Luke is not because of how special he was but because he failed and had to grew so often. We were with him for those failures and able to cheer when he finally overcame those obstacles. Rey never faced an obstacle she did not immediately overcome through her shear 'just awesomeness'. It is difficult to think of this character without rolling my eyes at how heavy handed this was. like the creator was trying to desperately make her look awesome and beg us to like her.
Exactly, the ST undermines not only the themes and lore of the OT but actually undermines the story and characters; It nearly renders the entirety of the first 6 movies null and void. Even the prequels as bad as they were with continuity and execution didn't undermine the main story.
I have done several breakdowns of Luke and demonstrated just how NOT awesome he is, and yet we love him and cheer for him. He loses almost every fight; when he flies (the one thing he is supposed to be good at) he crashes and/or is shot down almost every time; he fails almost every test and challenge; he is never one up on anyone.
So is James Bond a Mary Sue?
shareIn which movie?
Sometimes, yeah, he probably qualifies. Other times, I don't think he would.
What is interesting is when he qualifies he does not get the mountain of hate Rey does. Why is that? No I am not saying it is a gender thing. Maybe someone could elaborate on why that is.
shareI think I highlighted it in another post on this thread: he has more personality, including a bevvy of flaws, which make him both more fun and tolerable.
He has a philosophy of life (hedonism in the face of morality) which can be engaged with. Mentally you're agreeing or not, so you feel like you're in a dialogue of sorts with the character. He's witty and charming in a specific way. He has a kind of sophistication balanced with an animal/primal nature and that juxtaposition is interesting.
Then, there are his flaws. He drinks too much, womanizes, takes risks, and runs an ego that gets him into trouble and makes him fallible. That makes him at least appear human, even while he's swinging on a wristwatch grappling hook and shooting the bad guys down in impossible action scenes. So, we find his flaws relatable, or at least they allow him to be perceived as mortal.
So, compared to Rey, he's more engaging as a character, and he does not appear as godlike as she does.
Rey doesn't really have a lot of personality traits I can name. Brave, I guess. She wants to know about her past and parents. Is that a trait? She's curious? Sort of? I can't describe her as well because she's a bit "everyman".
What traits she does have are never negative. Rey doesn't have Bond's egomania. She doesn't have Finn's cowardice or Poe's bravado to normalize her.
This is the trick of an action movie hero. We have to relate to them even while they do the impossible. Bond accomplishes this with a magic trick: his personality lets him be flawed, even though the movie doesn't punish him for it very much (although, he does get reprimanded (by Judi Dench, usually) or fail (Casino Royale - the bomb maker; From Russia with Love and spotting Red Grant)). So he appears more flawed than he maybe is.
But he's *interesting* because of his humanity in his traits. Rey doesn't have interest as a smokescreen, so we get bored watching her and notice her deity/Mary Sue-ness.
You are trying to make it a argument about gender. That is why you are trying to shift the comparison of Rey from Wonder Woman and Alita (2 female characters that we are defending and specifically arguing are not Sue's compared to Rey) to a inquisition on James Bond (A male character). You want it to be about gender hence why you are trying to shift the argument. This is a disingenuous tactic.
Rey gets a mountain of hate because she is quite literally one of the worse written characters and arguably the most blatant example of a Mary Sue in all of widely accessed fiction; and her being such a blatant and remarkable Mary Sue characters was one of the major contributing factors to the Sequel trilogy being as bad as it is.
Good on you for keeping the thread on-topic!
I think it's fair, though, to say that Bond fills out most points for a Mary Sue-type character. But, as I pointed out above, there are reasons why we find him enduring and why he isn't a cookie-cutter Sue (with his alcoholism, womanizing, and other character flaws - as well as his *occasional* failures).
All that is to say that some people can overlook the Sue-ish traits and some people can't and that might vary from character to character. Maybe it's even fair to say that men find it harder to overlook the problems with Rey's character because they can't relate as much to her as a woman.
But, y'know...that's totally fair, and the Bond argument is very germane here. Lots of women, long before the modern "call out culture" world have said that they don't like Bond, often siting that it's "a guy thing" - or a variant of those words.
So Bond is a male hero for men; he's a wish-fulfillment escapist fantasy for guys. I would never criticize a woman for not being able to get into Bond films, so why criticize men for not being able to get into Rey as a protagonist?
Thanks, I can spot when someone has an agenda on this topic. No matter how clever they try to hide it there are some that just want to believe that criticism of Rey is based solely on sexism, which is and always was ridiculous (and frustrating). I have been on this discussion since the IMDB days and have seen this non-argument in at least hundreds of different forms.
He is pretty close to a Mary Sue-ish in terms of his execution as a character within the films; he's the most competent one around, the best, gets all the cool gadgets, all the beautiful women, he is suave and charming; and he always wins by the end. He is a male wish fulfillment character that is true. But this is countered by the fact that the character has a background that justifies those abilities and characteristics. Also he struggles and loses often in each films even though he eventually overcomes by the end. Rey neither has the background to justify her abilities and does not struggle much throughout the film and never loses in any significant way, in short she never suffers and never faces any real consequences.
Rey I would say though is not a 'female hero" either though, her gender is meaningless to her character. If you gender swapped Rey and Kylo the result would be almost no different. Those same men that could not get into Rey as a protagonist had no problem protagonist female characters such as Atila, Wonder Woman, Selene (underworld), Leeloo (5th Element), Ripley, Sarah Connor, Black Widow, Gamorhea/Nebula, or dozens of other female action heroins throughout cinema history. So what is the difference. Well for one, these other examples who they were mattered and they exemplified female characteristics that added to and enhanced their characters. Rey did not exemplify any female characteristics (well to be fair she really doesn't exemplify any human characteristics either) (note: I mean personality wise, not physically).
You have fair points. Thanks for elaborating and not being an uptight ignorant closed minded person like arflexit.
share"uptight ignorant closed minded person like arflexit."
ah, is someone upset their agenda and narrative B.S. got called out.
If you go through my chat history you will find I am one of the most reasonable and fair people when I am dealing with people that are genuine and reasonable. When I am dealing with disingenuous people that entire argumentation structure is based on fallacies, ad hominems, and baseless claims or suggestions of sexist motives in others, I stop being reasonable. Why? well because I will only be reasonable with people that make reasonable points or ask reasonable questions. Yours was a loaded question designed to shape a narrative. Either you know that and you are two-faced as all hell, or you don't know that and you are an idiot.
So I took your advice. I dug through your chat history. Your exact quote.
You are by far a bigger idiot than nearly anyone I have had a conversation with, and twice as much an asshole as I am which is goddamn impressive.
"So I took your advice. I dug through your chat history. Your exact quote."
lol, that is a little stalk-y.
I like how you cherry pick and try to bring up one of my most heated exchanges with someone that I now have on my ignore list as some proof, of what I don't know. Being an a hole to someone that is being an a hole, does not prove anything about my argument. So WTF is your point. Is this going to just keep devolving. Because if you are just gonna be an unreasonable prick I can just add you to my ignore list too, save us both some time.
"Second in that post it showcased you know nothing about cinematography which is not surprising honestly."
That poster proved nothing and I discussed cinematography in depth. The claim he was making was cinematography was a useless term as it was too 'open to interpretation' to have any meaning. I disagreed with that and provided reason and examples. Then the guy started calling me ignorant and used other ad hominems; just like you so it got more and more heated.
The topic of discussion is about Mary Sues is it not? I asked a simple question by asking if Bond was a Mary Sue. I then asked why Bond does not get the mountain of hate Rey does. All you could in your closed minded brain hear was sjw alert! Oh my gosh someone might like these films and not agree with my view sound the alarm! It was a question. Ace_Spade elaborated and gave me an answer. That is what a mature person does. I can respect him not you though. You are no better than the people who claim sexist when anyone criticizes Rey. You are just on the opposite end of the spectrum.
Nice way to make an assumption though. It gets annoying when people project an experience they have had from other people onto me. Although right back at you. I think it is funny how no one is allowed to think the Disney films are good. If you do you are labeled as an sjw moron who has no taste in cinema. I do not even like the Disney films, I was simply asking a question. You then proceeded to make yourself look foolish good job. People like you I laugh at honestly. You think your view is law and that only you are entitled to determine what makes a film good or not.
From that response you have shown you are not objective and have little to no credibility. So tell me should I put stock in your opinion?
You didn't post in the general discussion portion you were replying specifically to someone comparing Rey with ONLY other female characters. Your tried to shift it from an argument comparing Female to Female character to an inquisition on the 'Sueness' of a male character to try to shift the argument in a direction you wanted it to go and not on the argument at hand. YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU WERE DOING AND SO DO I. There are so many logical fallacies in your argument here I don't know where to start; but here it goes:
" All you could in your closed minded brain hear was sjw alert!"
Ad Hominem, I never attacked your character I attacked your disingenuous question. You respond by attacking my character.
"Oh my gosh someone might like these films and not agree with my view sound the alarm! "
Hyberbole and strawman; no one claimed this and you are creating a 'pretend' argument to ridicule.
"it was a question. Ace_Spade elaborated and gave me an answer
it was a loaded question designed to elicit the response that you wanted. You shouldn't play dumb unless you actually are. Ace_Spade also went on to thank me his quote to me"Good on you for keeping the thread on-topic" and that was in response to you taking it off topic.
"That is what a mature person does"
More ad hominem
respect has to be earned. don't give it freely.
"Nice way to make an assumption though."
It is not an assumption, it is a theory based in evidence; you are repeating the same non-arguments used by Rey defenders for 5 years. Your continue use of logic fallacies only makes my case all the more valid.
"It gets annoying when people project an experience they have had from other people onto me."
It is annoying to see the same non-arguments used to defend a bad character for 5 years, it is annoying to see any criticism get meet with character attacks and accusation of sexism based in no evidence.
To be continued...
Nope I was simply asking if James Bond was a Mary Sue. Or did I need to be specific and say Gary Stu?I simply was asking a question because I find it funny how people gave Rey endless hate yet other characters which are Mary Sues get a pass. I was simply referring to Bond as an example. Perhaps I should have referred to Bell Swan to not ruffle your feathers. This is all you assuming, so no I am not owning up to an accusation that is false.
Not a disingenuous question. It was an honest question. So nope.
I am going off what you were thinking. You know projecting kind of like how you did to me. Kind of annoying isn't it? Since he answered I was going to move on. He did thank you but in that same paragraph he also said but it was a fair question. So he unlike you is genuine. Do not cherry pick and make it seem as if he wrote me off the way you did. That would be disingenuous and we can't have that now can we?
You are judging me based off what others have said. Nice.
You did not even hear an argument from me. You heard a question and made an assumption. I have no issue with people disliking Rey.
Why did I have no issue with his response then? What is that I wanted since you can read minds. Another baseless assumption.
"I find it funny how people gave Rey endless hate yet other characters which are Mary Sues get a pass"
James Bond is not a Mary Sue, and this comment proves my whole point. Why question James Bond if you were not attempting to make it a non-argument based on accusations of sexism? That is why you asked about James Bond. So you can say guy "Sue's" get a pass while female "Sue's" get a "mountain of hate". You know what you were doing, and this comment proves I was not assuming anything, I called you out perfectly and now you have egg on your face.
Yes it was a disingenuous question. I did not say it was a dishonest question. Do you understand what the disingenuous means?
Again i was not projecting. The nature of the question alone suggested your agenda behind. You have proved and continue to prove I called you out on it perfectly. I am perfectly genuine, it is people like you that try to tear down other characters to deflect from criticisms of Rey that argue disingenuously. The whole point I was making is you were taking the discussion off topic so you could make claims about James Bond getting a pass while Rey gets "a mountain of hate". The fact that is the exact argument you have now made proves I called you out 100%. 'Me think you protest too much'
Your argument and agenda were already framed by the question itself. I didn't need to judge you on what others have said, you already said enough to show your argument. You just don't like I figured it out and called you out on it before you could even make it.
You took no issue with his response because 1. It moved the conversation where you wanted it to go. 2 he made an argument that one of the only reasons Bond is not a Sue is because of personality, which again moves the argument in a way that you can claim people scrutinized Rey unfairly because of her gender.
Depends on which James Bond you are referring to. In some cases he is a Mary Sue. You are completely wrong. I asked a simple question your projection tactic is no good here. You are proving yourself to be more ignorant with every post.
I know the meaning perfectly well. My question was not disingenuous you decided to take it that way.
I agree with Ace_Spade on every point he made. I just think tons of people do not realize there are Mary Sue characters that are Mary Sues but have redeeming characteristics which cover it up. So wrong again.
If what you said was true I would have went back and forth with Ace_Spade.I did not because he answered the question. Nice try though this is honestly pretty sad. Do you need someone to talk to? Everything going okay in your life?
"Depends on which James Bond you are referring to. In some cases he is a Mary Sue"
Wrong, just because a character is wish fullment does not make them by default a full on Mary Sue. James Bond does not qualify, though he does have some degree of Sue-ness it is never enough to justify the term in the same way it is with Rey.
" I asked a simple question your projection tactic is no good here."
Then just answer this one question, why did reply to a discussion about Wonder Woman and Atila and bring up James Bond (A notoriously Male Character)? Why not post it in the general discussion in reply to the original post?
"You are proving yourself to be more ignorant with every post."
Ad hominem, just because you call me ignorant over and over again does not make it so. If you are unaware of how the character James Bond has been used in the arguments in regards to Rey, then you are the one that is ignorant; and I mean that literally.
"My question was not disingenuous you decided to take it that way."
If you think your question was genuine and not hiding ulterior motives; then you are ignorant of the history of this argument. I find that highly unlikely. But for humors sack, I will explain it to . Rey defenders have brought up James Bond and Batman continously as examples of "Mary Sue's" that did not get the 'hate' Rey gets. This was an effort by the Rey defenders to cast allegations of sexism on the Rey critics. So by bringing up Bond as if the lack of hate of that character somehow invalidates the hate that Rey gets is just a disingenuous argument that comes with a very negative history. You are not the first to make this argument (even if you formed it as a question you were making an argument).
...
Wrong, just because a character is wish fullment does not make them by default a full on Mary Sue. James Bond does not qualify, though he does have some degree of Sue-ness it is never enough to justify the term in the same way it is with Rey.
(originally in fan fiction) a type of female character who is depicted as unrealistically lacking in flaws or weaknesses.
1. A definition is not the sum of a thing, it is a brief summary. I could write a book on single words to describe the meaning behind them.
2. Bond is not even close to lacking in flaws. He might be hyper competent and usually end up winning and getting the girl (which does make him wish fulfillment). but that does not make him flawless. He is brash, overconfident, is a womanizer and drinks way too much. He is also arrogant and defiant of his leadership and generally lacks ethics. He is not noble either or particular moral either. And that is true of nearly every version of the character.
" Now you hide behind oh he is not full on or wish fulfillment."
What are you trying to lie now, I fully acknowledge he is wish fulfillment, so is luke; Wish fulfillment alone is not sufficient to brand a character a Mary Sue. By the very definition you shared makes it so that Bond was not sufficient he does not meet the criteria of your own definition.
"Nope you either are or you are not. Period."
That is pretty black and white thinking, are you sure I am the ignorant one. No a thing is not always either is or is not. There is almost always shades of grey.
If it fits the definition you are allowed to refer to it as that.
List to me the Bonds you are referring to. As I pointed out earlier not all Bonds are Mary Sues.
There are shades of grey but since you are a cookie cutter Disne Star Wars hater I figured it would be best to frame it that way. This is why I can not stand projecting and baseless assumptions.
"If it fits the definition you are allowed to refer to it as that."
Yeah Bond does not even come close to fitting that particular definition. So how can you claim some variations of Bond are Sue's?
"List to me the Bonds you are referring to. As I pointed out earlier not all Bonds are Mary Sues."
I am making the claim that NO Bonds are Sue's why do I have to pick one out. you tell me, which do you think are Sue's and why?
"There are shades of grey but since you are a cookie cutter Disne Star Wars hater I figured it would be best to frame it that way. "
Cookie cutter? I have hated Disney Star Wars since TFA; do you have any idea how small minority of fans hated TFA? I hated Disney Star Wars before it was cool. I have seen almost every argument on both sides; some are cookie cutter some aren't. I assure you; I do not make cookie cutter arguments.
"This is why I can not stand projecting and baseless assumptions."
The assumption was not baseless. if you do not know that the 'But what about Bond' argument has been used thousands of times, than you are just ignorant of this discussion's history. I had a choice assume you were disingenuous or assume you were ignorant of the history of the "bond' argument. Disingenuous was the lesser insulting assumption, IMO.
I would say he does. You ever read any of the novels?
I was showcasing that calling you cookie cutter is the same as you projecting me to be a Rey defender. Let me state it again I do not like Rey. This is why I find this so stupid.
I was not disingenuous. All you had to do was answer the question like Ace_Spade. Instead you chose the rude way to respond.
"I would say he does."
Okay, when, which film is he a Mary Sue? humor me.
" You ever read any of the novels?"
No. I am discussing knowledge from the films only.
"you projecting me to be a Rey defender. Let me state it again I do not like Rey. This is why I find this so stupid."
You may not be a Rey defender (doubtful but okay). but you are making the same arguments that they do. That makes it impossible to distinguish you from them (which I think you are them and you are just 'pretending' to not be to side step you way out of doing a terrible job).
"This is why I find this so stupid."
I am finding it stupid for many reasons; but that is not one of them.
"I was not disingenuous."
Then let me ask you something, do you believe that at least some of the criticism of Rey (and the reason she was singled out and given "a mountain of hate") was because she was female?
"All you had to do was answer the question like Ace_Spade. Instead you chose the rude way to respond."
I'll say it again, if you would have asked that question in reply to the OP, I would have taken no issue with it and answered respectfully. You stupidly decided to reply to a post discussing specifically female characters and tried to shift it to a discussion of female vs male characters. That is why I went into attack mode (and not polite discussion). It was a stupid thing for you to do, and it either demonstrated intent (an agenda driven effort to shift the argument) or ignorance of the history. I suspect the former but I admit I could be wrong, but it is AT LEAST one of those 2 options. There is no third.
I am referring to the novels not the films.
I made no argument I asked a question. Asking a question is not making an argument it is asking a question.
Nope I believe the fact that she has no redeeming charming qualities is why she gets hate.
Nope I asked Ace_Spade and he answered it maturely unlike you. Learn from him. He makes far better points than you do.
"I just think tons of people do not realize there are Mary Sue characters that are Mary Sues but have redeeming characteristics which cover it up"
This is another comment that proves my assumption about you was correct. You were making a suggestion that people unfairly scrutinize Rey; and not other characters. And because you pointed to a male character as an example of a character that 'gets away with it' it heavily implies that you think it is because of the genders. You might try to deny it (which I notice you haven't done that yet) but that is what you are doing.
"So wrong again"
lol, I have not been wrong about a single thing. But I like how you think if you just say I am wrong it makes it so. It must be nice to live in your head, completely free from reason and accountability.
"I did not because he answered the question. "
Ace_Spade just did not pick up on the disingenuous nature of your question. But to counter your point, does this mean you can only tolerate an argument as long as it doesn't contradict your narrative, that is pretty pathetic. why not hold a position with enough reason so You can make an actual point instead of nonsequitars, hyperbole, ad hominems and generalized sophistry. Why is that all the posters I see arguing in defense of Rey use nothing but non-arguments.
" Nice try though this is honestly pretty sad."
Lol, you are just one of those people that have to have the last word no matter how ridiculous it is, aren't you.
"Do you need someone to talk to? Everything going okay in your life?"
Lol, you had to end on hyperbole just to really drive home the sophistry nail. what a pathetic way to try to deflect from you crap arguments and incredibly weak reasoning. (BTW, my life is great; I can say with confidence it is probably better than yours).
Nope I think it is because they have redeeming traits. Nothing to do with gender. Redeeming traits cover up Mary Sue. It is why Rey is a bland character. No redeeming traits like Bond.
Oh you have been wrong about multiple things. It is cute you think you have not been though.
No he just answered the question like a mature person should. I can debate with people I disagree with all day. It is when they project and make baseless assumptions is when I get irritated. Non starter arguments are the worst.
Nope I just know pitiful behavior when I see it.
I do not know if my life is better than yours. I do enjoy my life quite a bit though. Thing is see I do not say my life is better than yours because it may or may not be. I unlike you do not assume lol.
"Nope I think it is because they have redeeming traits. Nothing to do with gender. Redeeming traits cover up Mary Sue. It is why Rey is a bland character. No redeeming traits like Bond."
You see if you had made this type of comment in reply to the OP I would have thought it was a good point to start, why or why did you have to reply to the post about wonder woman and atila.
I disagree with your interpretation of a Mary sue, but I think we could have a reasonable discussion about that, but instead you seem set on fallacies and generally being a prick.
"Oh you have been wrong about multiple things."
prove it.
" It is when they project and make baseless assumptions is when I get irritated."
Like i get irritated with fallacies, being called ignorant, immature?
"Non starter arguments are the worst."
lol, then why do you use them with 90% of you sentences?
"Nope I just know pitiful behavior when I see it."
So now I am "pitiful", tell me; am I more ignorant, immature or pitiful. Remind me also, how many names have i called you other than prick?
"Thing is see I do not say my life is better than yours because it may or may not be. I unlike you do not assume lol"
lol, a person that has a good life does not post questions such as "Do you need someone to talk to? Everything going okay in your life?" I didn't bring up the conditions of our life, you did. hence my answer. I also said "probably" better than yours. that word has significance you know.
"no one is allowed to think the Disney films are good"
who said this? More hyperbole and strawmaning. I personally take no issue with Disney who does produce both good and bad films. I admit I have not been thrilled by their recent track record of the last 5 or 6 years, between star wars and those lousy 'live-action' remakes. But I don't hate all their content.
" sjw moron who has no taste in cinema."
More strawmaning; I attributed nothing of the sort to you. You are now accusing me that which you are guilty of (projecting). I did not attack you and say that you are anything, I simply pointed out the disengenious nature of your argument. You are the one that has personalized it. Attacking your opinion is not the same as attacking your character. But people like you conflate your opinion with your character (and also can't seem to distinguish the 2 apart).
"I was simply asking a question."
Again it was a loaded disingenuous question to shift the argument to one based on the gender of the character, from a comparison of female only character to a male one instead so you could try to point out hypocrisy in people's interpretation of Rey versus James Bond. THAT IS WHAT YOU WERE DOING AND YOU DAMN WELL KNOW IT.
"You then proceeded to make yourself look foolish good job."
More ad hominems. Can you even formulate a single argument not based on accusations and fallacies?
"You think your view is law and that only you are entitled to determine what makes a film good or not."
Hyperbole and strawmaing; You want to make the argument a film or character are good? than make an actual argument instead of resorting to sophistry the immediate second your poor arguments are called out. I do not think my opinion is by default more valid than yours, I think my opinion is better because I use logic, reason and consistency to come to my conclusion and make an argument based on that. You want respect, do the same.
I can tell by the way you responded that you would not accept people liking them. If so you would not make baseless assumptions.
It was not a disingenuous question. I am being honest here. The funny thing is I do not like Rey. I honestly do not.
Again no it was not. If you had simply answered like the other mature person that would have been the end of it. Instead you wanted to make a baseless assumption, and now here we are.
I would make my argument, but you want to cast a generalization onto me over a simple question. I made no argument so no argument of mine got called out. A question got called out and misinterpreted. Then what is my argument since I made one. Go ahead and point to an argument I made for the films I like. I got all day go ahead and prove it. You want respect? Provide proof.
I like quite a few disney movies, and I like the Marvel movies. In fact outside of Star Wars and the 'live action' remakes I like disney movies. My assumptions were not baseless. in fact the arguments you continue to make prove my assumption was accurate.
Again, Disingenuous =/= dishonest. You don't have to like Rey to be a Rey defender. If you feel that Rey is unfairly criticised and that is based in sexism you will still defender and try to point to male characters that the 'sexist manbay basement dweller' Rey critics give a pass to. Which is exactly what you have done. You are saying James Bond gets a pass and Rey does not; by this you are suggesting and trying to create a narrative that it is because of sexism.
Again it was not baseless, considering you made the exact argument I said you were going to kind of proves it was not baseless. We are were we are because of you and the combination of 5 years of bad arguments in defense of Rey and the fact that you picked a conversation discussing differences between only female character to try to change the narrative. If you were just asking a genuine non-agenda driven question, you would have been replying to the OP and not the subchat specifically comparing Rey to Atila and Wonder Woman.
Here is your argument that I responded to: "What is interesting is when he qualifies he does not get the mountain of hate Rey does. Why is that? No I am not saying it is a gender thing. Maybe someone could elaborate on why that is." You say it is 'not' gender based but the fact you put that in their creates the narrative of it. It is a disingenuous tactic. sorta like saying 'I am not calling you a sexist pig, but everything you say is sexist'
You claiming to like Disney movies makes you look like a liar. It makes you seem like you are saying that to save face. Someone can still be racist against black people while having a black friend/acquaintance. Poor argument. Since you projected onto me and made a baseless assumption I will do the same to you. I think you are a cookie cutter Disney Star Wars hater. See that is a poor way of debating isn't it?
I am not a Rey defender. I am calling you out on your biased BS and you know it. Why not chime in on the subchat? You often get more responses that way.
I put that in there because you know damn well even if I just asked the question of why Bond gets less hate than Rey you would still go down that rabbit hole. You do it because you are triggered and not mature enough to debate. You never answered the question. Had you answered that would have been the end. I proved my point on that. You failed here.
"You claiming to like Disney movies makes you look like a liar. It makes you seem like you are saying that to save face."
Do you want me to list the disney movies I like. I like nearly all of them with the exception of Star Wars and the live action remakes. I love the animated classics, the Cars movies, Toy Story, almost all MArvel movies, and on and one. It is ridiculous to call me a liar on that. That IS ACTUALLY baseless accusation.
"Someone can still be racist against black people while having a black friend/acquaintance."
find me some real examples of this. pretty sure this is a baseless claim to. Are you trying to just make a bunch of them no so you can contend the claims I made were equally baseless? Not all claims have equal amounts of evidence going for them you know.
"See that is a poor way of debating isn't it?"
yeah, but the difference is I have actual evidence for my claims. Evidence is kind of bitch to get around.
"I am not a Rey defender."
Your argue like a Rey defender, you make all the same arguments and fallacies, you rely on ad hominems and other disingenuous tactics; you want it to be an argument about sexism. If you quake like a duck, look like a duck and act like a duck; people might call you a duck (because you are one. Or you are an insane person that believes they are a duck.
"I am calling you out on your biased BS and you know it."
Lol, when did you call me out on anything? the only thing you tried to call me out on was baseless assuming and i have proved over and over and you have confirmed over and over the claim was not only valid but also accurate.
"Why not chime in on the subchat? You often get more responses that way."
You could have picked any other subchat; you had no idea the type of following or response this particular one would get. You saw the discussion about female characters and wanted to shift the focus of the topic.
...
Kind of like the baseless accusation that I made an argument for Rey? Cars I think is absolute trash. You are making the very argument I csaid was stupid. You speak the language of every Disney Star Wars hater out there. Therefore I will project exactly like you did. Since you sound just like them you dislike Disney. ALso most Marvel movies are bland as well no surprise you like them.
Do I need to hold your hand? Hitler once spared a commanding officer which was Jewish. I guess that means he was not racist... A claim with actual truth and facts unlike yours.
If your evidence is so solid why have I dismantled it so easily?
On your lies. You said I mad an argument for Rey. I gave you the chance to prove it and you failed.
Nope not at all. Keep deluding yourself.
"you know damn well even if I just asked the question of why Bond gets less hate than Rey you would still go down that rabbit hole"
No would not have. I am perfectly reasonable and fair to people that are reasonable and fear. And not disingenuous people with agendas.
"ou do it because you are triggered and not mature enough to debate. "
sure I am, I am also just to old to beat around the bush. I call shit like I see it.
"you never answered the question"
what are you like insane or something. I answered it now at least 3 times. James Bond is NOT a Mary sue and that is why he does not get the hate Rey does.
" Had you answered that would have been the end"
I answered it three times at least and each time you just answered with "well it depends on which version" B.S. you don't even specify which. You never wanted to argue the specifics you wanted the discussion to shift to 'James Bond gets a pass because he is male" that is why you do not have details and specifics of Bond prepared for your argument because the details for you never mattered.
"You failed here."
Well because you said it it must be so. You know what, fuck this. you are reported and welcome to my ignore. That is reserved for only the shittest posters I have come across. dumb asses like you is what ruined IMDB. piss off.
BS! You still would have!
Nope you are a deluded person who can't take an opposing view.
Um yeah no there are plenty of Mary Sue James Bonds. You by your own admission never read the novels.
Nope I just played your game and beat you at it. It is quite obvious you know nothing about films.
Reported for what? Disagreeing with you?
So superherocrazed was clearly a sock account. I blocked them for about 3 months; but for fun I unblocked just to see what the reply was (curiosity got the better of me).
Look at the account 27 posts in totally almost all directed at me. Since I ignored them not a single new post in over 3 months. Anyone reading this; look at the nature of the TFA defender; they never, and I mean never argue in good faith. Dishonesty, deflections, manipulations, passive aggressiveness, condescension is the name of their game.
"From that response you have shown you are not objective and have little to no credibility. So tell me should I put stock in your opinion?"
and to top it off, you end on a appeal to credibility fallacy. I as a person have no more credibility in judging cinema than anyone else; that is why I make an argument based in reason and logic and do not rely on credibility; I let my reasoning be my credibility which should be divorced of me as a person anyway; even if someone else presenting my reasoning it should hold up to scrutiny; which based on the fact you could not present a single non-fallacy based argument would demonstrate my reasoning is better than yours at least.
I never claimed to be objective; but I made an argument based in objectivity. There was not a single subjective based claim from my side.
You shouldn't put stock in my opinion. I didn't even present an opinion; I presented facts and reason. I also made a claim that your argument was based on disingenuous premises and you have basically now confirmed my claim, so.. good job for being yet another failed Rey defender.
Your reasoning is poor then. You cast a generalization off of a simple question. You did not answer the question. That is how you know someone's argument is completely weak. Rather than answer it they would rather destroy the person's credibility rather than answer it. That is what you tried to do to me.
You can not prove my question was about gender.
No you presented a baseless assumption and are salty because I called you on it. Where did I defend Rey? Point to where I defended Rey. Provide the proof since you claim you present facts and reason. Good job on being a cookie cutter Disney Star Wars hater. What if I said that? Sounds ignorant doesn't it?
It was not a simple question, it was a loaded agenda driven question. I know this because you were not replying to the OP, you picked a sub chat comparing only female characters and tried to change it to a chat on a male character. James Bond was not the subject of the sub chat, Rey, Atila and Wonder Woman were. If you were just asking an 'honest' question you would have put your question as a reply to the OP. Stop playing dumb.
Of course I can. When people are comparing only 3 female characters and then you say "what about this male character, why does he get a pass"? that proves it was about gender.
A common tactic of they Rey defender is to attack and tear down other male characters from other works and then say there is a degree of sexism that went into the criticisms of Rey
Nope you took it that way. Just because you take something a certain way does not mean it is that way. The subject was about Mary Sues period. It is a public forum I am allowed to ask any question anytime I want to.
No you can not. I see character not gender. Maybe I should have brought up Bella Swan?
Guess what never did that. Prove to where I tore down James Bond. I never did. More projections and baseless assumptions. A common tactic from Disney Star Wars haters is to disguise their sexist tactic and say they hate Rey because of her being Mary Sue but really it is because she is female. That is a stupid statement now isn't it? Yours is the exact same thing on the opposite end of the spectrum.
"The subject was about Mary Sues period."
Nope, the OP was a subject on Mary Sue, the post you replied to was specificly on Wonder Woman and Atila. You messed up big time picking to reply to that instead of the OP. You can, but you have to be prepared to defend your point or position (or be prepared to give reason or explanation for being disingenuous). If you weren't agenda driven you just would have said sorry and admitted you picked a bad post to reply to and delete it and move it to the general discussion and not on the discussion of Wonder Woman and Atila. Instead you double and triple down in your stupidity.
"No you can not. I see character not gender. Maybe I should have brought up Bella Swan?"
You could have, why didn't you? Why did you pick a male character to reply to a comment on Female characters, hmm?
"Prove to where I tore down James Bond. I never did. "
lol, seriously ever point you have been making so far is about how Rey should not get hate because James Bond doesn't. That was your whole point. You are saying that if Rey is a MAry sue and deserves hate, so does James bond. what an blatantly dishonest comment.
" A common tactic from Disney Star Wars haters is to disguise their sexist tactic and say they hate Rey because of her being Mary Sue but really it is because she is female."
They could try to say that but I would simply reply with all the female action heroes I like, which would make the claim fall apart. Where has any of my claims on you fallen apart. You have no response so you try to deflect.
"Yours is the exact same thing on the opposite end of the spectrum."
Nope, mine is based in evidence and reason as I have proved again and again. Not all arguments are equal. Some people actually understand the reasons behind their opinions and interpretation and can articulate them. you are not one of those people
My response to Ace_Spade undermines your point. Notice I have no issue with him. Point debunked. This makes your argument fall apart.
Bond is more known. Why didn't you just respond like Ace_Spade hmm? I know the answer because you an insecure person.
Nope I was wondering why Rey gets hate where as Bond does not. I never said she should not. If I did go ahead and provide that proof. I have given you several chances to prove where I said Rey should not get hate because Bond does not. You can't do it lol. I was simply wondering why.
Nope that is also disingenuous. You missed my point about race huh? If someone is part of the KKK and kills black people in their spare time, then when confronted says I am not racist I have black friends... It is a good mask you can use but someone can still be sexist while liking female action heroes from the past. I am not saying you are but in the end your reasoning is poor.
No it is not. It is based on assumptions. You do not even know a thing about cinematography.
"My response to Ace_Spade undermines your point. Notice I have no issue with him. Point debunked. This makes your argument fall apart."
Or maybe he just assumed you were ignorant and immediately forgave you for going off topic? I am less forgiving.
" This makes your argument fall apart."
Sure it does, whatever makes you feel better.
"Why didn't you just respond like Ace_Spade hmm?"
again because I called you out for posing a narrative agenda driven question. He did not, either because he didn't catch it or he is ignorant of the "but bond is too" argument as well.
"I know the answer because you an insecure person."
So i'm immature, ignorant, pitiful and now insecure as well? It must be nice to not have to reason your way out of a problem you created and just cast all kinds of labels on your opponents. You must be a joy to discuss politics with.
"Nope I was wondering why Rey gets hate where as Bond does not."
Because Bond is a not a Mary Sue.
" I was simply wondering why."
You know damn well why, you picked a specific post to reply to; it was not just a random question.
"If someone is part of the KKK and kills black people in their spare time, then when confronted says I am not racist I have black friends"
What kind of point is that? Can you find me one time in history a blatant white supremacist 'pretended' to have black friends? Supremacist are overt not covert.
"someone can still be sexist while liking female action heroes from the past"
That is just incorrect. what would make them sexist if they like certain females but not others? It is just judging things individually. That is not sexism.
"I am not saying you are but in the end your reasoning is poor."
You counter reasoning is even poorer. as I have just demonstrated.
"You do not even know a thing about cinematography."
Are you a banned user that created a new account? You picked out a very specific discussion from my history to bring up and focus on
No I give people the benefit of the doubt. You said you are less fogiving, you meant to say I am more ignorant. Fixed that for you.
Oh I know for a fact you would be hilarious to discuss politics with. Your baseless assumptions would make you look even more foolish than you have displayed here.
Depends on which Bond you are referring to.
It was a random question.
It is a relevant point. Many times when someone wants to make a racist comment but not be labeled racist they will do things like that. They will say I am not racist I have black friends then proceed to say something racist against that particular race.
I said someone can be sexist while still liking certain female action heroes from the past. I did not say just because you dislike them that makes you sexist. Nice attempt at twisting my words here.
Um yeah nope. It is your right to be wrong though.
Nope I used to be on imdb years ago and heard this was the new spot to discuss films.
"You said you are less forgiving, you meant to say "I am more ignorant."" There I literally fixed that for you. learn to use quotes correct you just said that you are more ignorant not me. But nice to see more reliance on ad hominem. Go back and tell me one thing I said that was based in ignorance. NAME ONE DAMN THING THAT WAS BASED SOLELY IN IGNORANCE. My assumption was based on history and evidence. That is literally the opposite of ignorance. If anything I am cursed by too much knowledge and I suspect people have more information than they do (which might be the case here, but I doubt it). I think you are 'playing dumb' in an attempt to flame me.
"Your baseless assumptions "
Again I'll say it: NOT BASELESS, EVIDENCE BASED. hundreds of Rey defenders have used the "but what about James Bond" non-argument, and I mean hundreds. That is called EVIDENCE. You are either ignorant of that (which is doubtful) or you are lying.
"you look even more foolish than you have displayed here."
So i am now immature, ignorant, pitiful, insecure and foolish? ARe you like trying to go for a record of how many ad hominems you can stack on top of each other? Go back in are conversation, how many names did I call you? remind me who the immature and reasonable one is again. You have to be flaming.
"Depends on which Bond you are referring to."
I like that you keep saying "depends on which bond" but than never specify which is and which isn't. pretty disingenuous that.
"It was a random question."
No it wasn't. Either you know that and are lying or you are just completely ignorant of the history of the "what about james bond" argument. I suspect it is the former.
"They will say I am not racist I have black friends then proceed to say something racist against that particular race."
So you are saying they only CLAIM to have black friends but than say something racist against blacks? They don't actually have the black friends in this hypothetical fiction? ...
The fact that I made an argument for Rey. I asked a question, I made no argument that is a baseless assumption.
If I am ignorant of this that would mean you are wrong. Which would also make you an idiot! Going by your ego though you are going to assume I am not because you do not want to look stupid.
You went in on attack mode therefore only fitting you be called out on your behavior. When someone displays disgusting behavior I call them out on it.
Annoying when someone won't answer a question directly huh? I was simply giving you a taste of your own medicine.
Yes it was.
You missed the point. If someone is part of the KKK and kills black people but then secretly has a black friend would they still be racist?
"I said someone can be sexist while still liking certain female action heroes from the past."
Even if they were actually sexist in person, if they like some female action heroes and dislike others for various individual reasons; then the opinion is not sexist based, it is individual based. Everytime you do this you push more the narrative of Rey critics are sexist; which was what your initial disingenuous question was designed to do. You say it was a baseless assumption and yet everything you say confirms that assumption was 100% accurate.
"I did not say just because you dislike them that makes you sexist"
The "what about james bond" argument is just that though. It creates a narrative suggestion that criticizing Rey but not James Bond is because Rey critics are sexist. That is what the non-argument does. Why else compare arguably the most popular example of a male wish fulfillment character when compared to the wish fulfillment of the character Rey?
"Nice attempt at twisting my words here."'
I didn't twist your words, I saw right through them. You are just pissed because i figured out your game immediately and now you spent hours trying to save face.
"It is your right to be wrong though."
If I am wrong, why is it that I didn't rely on any logical fallacies? To say I am wrong is to say objective logic and reason are wrong. Evidence is wrong. History is wrong. Maybe sophistry isn't even a real thing, am I right?
"Nope I used to be on imdb years ago and heard this was the new spot to discuss films."
You picked out a very specific discussion from one of only 4 or 5 ignored users I have on my list. That conversation was from months ago. How did you come to find that particular conversation unless you were looking for it? I have had hundreds of posts since then. How long did you spend going through my chat history, you creepy little worm?
Thus proving my point they can still be sexist. Your concession is noted. They can also dislike an individual for sexist reasons.
No it does not. It is a simple question. If what you said was true why did I not dispute Ace_Spade's points? You have no retort to that. You are wrong here and you know it.
No you twisted them and I saw through your game. It is why now you assume I made an argument. I then ask you to prove it and you can't. I provided a contradiction myself just by going through your chat history. I even quoted it and gave you a link.
Baseless assumptions are logical fallacies. You projected your past experience with others onto me.
I read quite a bit. Therefore I figured I would do some digging. I could show you another post you made which was foolish but I figure I will spare you the torment.
If they make a James Bond movie about a homeless nobody who has never held a gun before all of a sudden become the greatest spy of all time in a single day then sure.
shareI will say this in a simple way. James Bond is a TRAINED spy with decades of experience. His skills, competence and reverence is explained by his background. And even then sometimes he is depicted as almost being Mary Sue like (and that is with the experience and training). Rey has neither experience or training and yet has James Bond levels of competence.
shareAnd with all that training, and even being very good... Bond is not that good. He often needs to use all kind of dirty tricks to outsmart his opponents.
Rey, on the contrary, not only she doesn't need any training, but she doesn't even need to play dirty. She's just The Superior Female Being.
That is true; Bond is often in over his head against superior opponents but because he is quick on his feet and willing to fight dirty he overcomes. Rey never has such struggles.
I have said it before; I am not sure if her being so overpowered was 'because' she is a female character. I think Rey is just JJ's mindless fulfillment. I get the sense he is the pathetic type of person that likes to imagine themselves being god like and loved by everyone. I think JJ would have wrote this character exactly the same if she were male; I think it was an 'executive decision' that the lead be female but the extreme hyper Sueness was the result of bad writing and wish fulfilment on part of the writer (Abrams.)
Rey is Kennedy all the way, JJ got the job because he can make it reality. It's literally the core reason why these movies are shockingly terrible.
shareAlso, she was the best at everything. Best pilot. Best mechanic. Best Jedi. Best leader. etc.
I'm surprised TFA didn't include a short scene where she's giving engineers advice on how to design spaceships, just to let us know she's also smarter than any of the men.
Yeah, that "best-ness" doesn't help the case, does it?
shareYes exactly, the way the film is framed it goes very far out of its way to put emphasis on just how much "best-ness" she has. The framing made it even worse, because it was like a little kid waving something in your face screaming "look at how awesome this thing is" and you are just like 'ah, it is not that great' but then the kid just keeps waving it your face anyway no matter how annoyed you get.
shareIts Rey Palpatine, she is a Sith.
shareLuke is Darth Vaders son, Kylo is his grandson ... Rey beats both easily in her first try ... Even though Luke+Vader beat Palpatine.
Rey then beats Palpatine and kills Kylo twice.
Rey is a joke of a character and will go down as such in history.
The true joke is the prequels and your taste in films.
shareAll true with the exception of Luke and Vader beating Palpatine, they did not really beat him; Luke was about to be killed by the Emperor then Vader surprise attacked him. That is not really 'beating' him the same way Rey clearly and unarguably defeats literally everyone in straight up fights. No one even stands a chance against her most of the time.
Interesting enough this problem of Rey being too powerful creates the same problem the Droid army vs Jedi in the prequels created. When your heroes can cut through the bad guys "like cheese) it negates all tension in the plot.
Totally wrong, after TROS she is now more of a Mary Sue than she was before because now she can force heal with no explanation whatsoever.
The truth is Rey is NOT a strong female, she's an entitled Princess who had everything handed to her and never had to work for anything. She is a weak female character who never earned the name "Skywalker" but I guess according to SJW's if you feel you are something then you are.
And FYI playing the gender card is cowardly, you should be ashamed of yourself.
It's the standard strategy as they have no actual argument.
shareNo thing is it gets old when people think their opinion is law. According to you haters anyone who likes the Disney Star Wars films can not have intelligence. No one is allowed to have a view on them except you.
shareThe difference is the "haters" actually give a reasoning why they dislike the movie, whereas the others seem to always resort to calling thme bigots and sexists instead of having any arguments to put forth.
share[deleted]